Prisons: Mental or Physical? Helvetica Haydn Taylor (NC Hu) At present, England is facing its third lockdown. The majority of last year was spent locked away from society and for many people was incredibly gruelling. But what was really keeping us in? Was it the government-imposed laws? Or the mental turmoil caused by the fear of the invisible killer? As of 2020, there were over 11 million people incarcerated in actual prisons around the world1; these people live every day of their lives in a form of continuous lockdown. By looking at different models of incarceration I want to explore which is the most successful method: mental or physical containment? For the purpose of this essay, I am defining the term ‘most successful’ as the method which produces the lowest reoffending rate, as well as being the least damaging to the prisoners once they have completed their sentence. The word surveillance, meaning ‘close observation’, is derived from the French words: sur ( from above) and veillance (watching). This concept is very much true to the way in which numerous incarceration systems operate around the world – inundated with overhead security cameras and multiple guards stationed behind glass barriers – probably what comes to mind upon hearing the word ‘prison’. In places such as North America and the UK this has become the classic prison model, including around-the-clock supervision and scrutiny, with any breach of the institution’s code of conduct subject to severe punishment. However, although this may be the model that we are most familiar with as a society, it is only one of many in place around the world today. For many years, the controversy surrounding mental versus physical imprisonment has been rooted in these systems, with many countries in recent years weighing up the most successful ways to manage their crime rates. Model of the panopticon
17
